Stopper v. Manhattan Life Insurance Co. of New York’s Empirical Analysis
241 F.2d 465 · 1957
Citation profile
6 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2005
6 federal appellate ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Evans v. Penn Mutual Life Insurance · Freedman v. Mutual Life Insurance Co. of New York · Burton v. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance · Bailey v. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance · Kizirian v. United Benefit Life Insurance
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * the knowledge of the insured that he is making a false statement itself establishes the bad faith on the basis of which a verdict must be directed. This is such a case, since the documents in evidence make it clear that the insured must have known that he was withholding the more recent and significant part of the information requested concerning medical consultations and treatment * * * ( 241 F.2d at p. 468 .)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.